So, are there any other androgynous intersexuals on here? Anyone friends with any? I'm dominantly male.
Results 1 to 15 of 15
So, are there any other androgynous intersexuals on here? Anyone friends with any? I'm dominantly male.
would you mind defining that term in the sense that your using it, cause usually "androgynous" (when it comes to people) means not dressing according to male or female standards?
is that what youre talking about?
My body, my labor, my power.
</div><table border=\'0\' align=\'center\' width=\'95%\' cellpadding=\'3\' cellspacing=\'1\'><tr><td>QUOTE (LSD @ Apr 30 2006, 05:02 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id=\'QUOTE\'>Now Leninists and strict Marxists will tell you that "transitional" hierarchy is nescessary to "prepare" us for classless society, but notice how they avoid telling you exactly what "transitional" means in definite terms.
In the Soviet Union "transitional" meant about 73 years and the only thing that it "transitioned" into was gangster capitalism.
China's not quite there yet, so far only 57 years of "transition", but it looks like the end result's not going to be any more encouraging.
At this point, the doctrine of "transition" had been pretty much debunked. The only thing that creating a "new kind" of hiearchy does is create a new hierarchy. And if we're interested in emancipation, giving ourselves new masters doesn't exactly help.</td></tr></table><div class=\'signature\'>
</div><table border=\'0\' align=\'center\' width=\'95%\' cellpadding=\'3\' cellspacing=\'1\'><tr><td>QUOTE (LSD @ Jul 17 2006, 05:33 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id=\'QUOTE\'>I've got the least sectarian cock on the board!</td></tr></table><div class=\'signature\'>
i'll use webster's definition. androgynous - having the characteristics or nature of both male and female.
ur right in part, but i'm a biological androgyne. i was born intersexed.
Oh! sorry i missed the "intersexed" part. maybe you should have put that in the title? :P
anyway. sorry for the confusion. and no, im all woman here.
My body, my labor, my power.
</div><table border=\'0\' align=\'center\' width=\'95%\' cellpadding=\'3\' cellspacing=\'1\'><tr><td>QUOTE (LSD @ Apr 30 2006, 05:02 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id=\'QUOTE\'>Now Leninists and strict Marxists will tell you that "transitional" hierarchy is nescessary to "prepare" us for classless society, but notice how they avoid telling you exactly what "transitional" means in definite terms.
In the Soviet Union "transitional" meant about 73 years and the only thing that it "transitioned" into was gangster capitalism.
China's not quite there yet, so far only 57 years of "transition", but it looks like the end result's not going to be any more encouraging.
At this point, the doctrine of "transition" had been pretty much debunked. The only thing that creating a "new kind" of hiearchy does is create a new hierarchy. And if we're interested in emancipation, giving ourselves new masters doesn't exactly help.</td></tr></table><div class=\'signature\'>
</div><table border=\'0\' align=\'center\' width=\'95%\' cellpadding=\'3\' cellspacing=\'1\'><tr><td>QUOTE (LSD @ Jul 17 2006, 05:33 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id=\'QUOTE\'>I've got the least sectarian cock on the board!</td></tr></table><div class=\'signature\'>
I do see the discrimination androgynes face for not being a part of the gender binary. I personally am a part of that binary (male) but understand people who break the mold.
Signature Virus - Copy this into your signature.
You said "gender binary." I've never heard anyone else use that term. I got my influences for the articulation from cultural anthropology. How about you?
Well, generally, people think of biological sex/hormones/chromosomes as a binary:
Male
Female
Though it's actually more of a continuum than anything else:
Male------------------------|------------------------Female
The same goes for gender identity:
Male------------------------|------------------------Female
The gender role you might fit in (this has nothing to do with biological sex, and neither do gender identity or "gender expression"--in a society without stereotypes, both sexes would fit about equally into all the gender roles):
"Male" gender role-------------------------|----------------------"Female" gender role
Your "gender expression"--whether you'd normally wear clothes and adopt the mannerisms typical of society's view of one gender or the other (in reality both sexes would equally fit into any given space of "gender expressions" but we are in a patriarchal and stereotyped society):
"Male gender expression"-------------------------|-----------------------"Female gender expression"
So I do fit into a gender binary, but it doesn't actually exist biologically.
Signature Virus - Copy this into your signature.
That was a very well laid out post, nice work
Thanks. It's hard to get the quotation marks right on these kind of things.Originally posted by Black Dagger@Jul 18 2006, 09:34 AM
That was a very well laid out post, nice work
Signature Virus - Copy this into your signature.
Well done indeed. It's good to see people with views similiar to my own.
As much as i know that talking about everying as a "continuum" is very much in vogue and hip and all, what you are presenting as a fact is just a hypothesis, one that seems intuitively incorrect and that you offer no empirical or logical support for.
With regard to the majority of the population, sex is in fact a binary, which is to say there are two catagories. Capitalism didn't just make this up, its true for all vertebrates and based on the reproductive biology thats driven evolution for millions of year. Theres nothing good or bad about this its just how it is, empirically.
There are some extremely rare intersexed conditions which represent rare third, fourth, fifth, etc catagories, with additional or fewer sex chromosomes or genetic mutations which affect hormones in fetal development in such a way that the individual has unusual sexual characteristics.
But this doesn't mean that sex is a continuum, it simply means that in addition to the two catagories that cover most of the species, there are a number of rare catagories. A continuum is not the diametric opposite and sole alternative to "a binary", and outliers that don't fit into two catagories don't imply a continuum.
To say that "gender role" has "nothign to do with biological sense" is pretty silly. The entire concept of "gender role" is the social role prevalant among members of one biological sex rather than the other; it has everything to do with biological sex. Gender is the social corollary to sex (and sex is the biological corollary to gender). The fact these may not be one to one coorespondences doesn't mean that they aren't tied to each other.
"Gender expression" as a concept you're introducing now which seems to be just another artificial layer of this contrieved hypothesis. Everyone's behavior is viewed in terms of their gender, but their gender is determined by their sex or at least what people assume their sex to be. A very masculine lesbian doesn't fit on the same spot on the "gender expression continuum" as a heterosexual male football player because gender sterotypes are viewed explicitly in terms of the person's sex (or, in the case of intersex and transgendered people, people's assumptions about their sex), so to try to decouple "gender expression" and suggest that these are seperate "continuums" makes very little sense in a real social context.
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
How did I know you were going to disagree with me no matter what I said?
Unfortunately, "the majority of the population" doesn't comprise the entire population.
No SHIT!
I meant in a society without stereotypes, ie communism.
Or are you saying there are intrinsic mental or psychological differences between males and females?
Bio-females can wear "boys clothes" and still be considered girls, right...?
Signature Virus - Copy this into your signature.
Check this article out from Pychology Today---4 pages long
7. Creative people, to an extent, escape rigid gender role stereotyping. When tests of masculinity/femininity are given to young people, over and over one finds that creative and talented girls are more dominant and tough than other girls, and creative boys are more sensitive and less aggressive than their male peers.
This tendency toward androgyny is sometimes understood in purely sexual terms, and therefore it gets confused with homosexuality. But psychological androgyny is a much wider concept referring to a person's ability to be at the same time aggressive and nurturant, sensitive and rigid, dominant and submissive, regardless of gender. A psychologically androgynous person in effect doubles his or her repertoire of responses. Creative individuals are more likely to have not only the strengths of their own gender but those of the other one, too.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pt...701-000033.html
So I bothered to read the psychology today article, considering the excerpt chosen was only moderately ethnocentreic. I am no fan of so-called "psychology."
Then, I got what I expected.
"2. Creative people tend to be smart yet naive at the same time."
Slanderous.
and then some psychobabble, the "g factor."
Ok, first of all, stop the mathematical rhetoric. Creativity is not dominated by mathematical theory. If anything, creativity is, and I use the term loosely, anarchistic. Even that's too much and too less though.
"As Howard Gardner remarked in his study of the major creative geniuses of this century, a certain immaturity, both emotional and mental, can go hand in hand with deepest insights. Mozart comes immediately to mind."
Mr. Gardner apparently failed to meet up with the paranoiac-critical nihilistic absurdist anarchist cache niche.
By the way, Mozart's last five symphonies are sumptuous.
Tests that MEASURE creativity? A test is restrictive and finite. Creativity's unlimited and infinite, not to mention intangible. Did they really talk to creative people? In their conclusions in psychological significant digits, they lost the nuances of creativity. Nuances - very important.
Ut oh, two opposite ways of thinking...their trap for giving a bipolar diagnosis and sedating creativity for "the good of the people," "for security," "for freedom," "to get better."
No agreed upon solution is a solution. It is the null set, and its result/product could be tension, strain, chaos, toxicity, or calm and peace and a method of escape from the confines of solutions.
"originality in picking unusual associations of ideas."
Ok, that's decent - for a psychology writer. But I wouldn't say unusual - that says that reality must always be confirmed by a majoral group of third parties. I wouldn't say associations either. The prefix "as-" means to or toward. There doesn't have to be togetherness. Oil and water may be in the same glass, but they are not together, their molecules are pushing away from each other to keep them separate. Only to the eye do they appear "touching." And really, lets not anthropomorphize water and oil. Water is to oil as skin is to skin? Oh the semantics! Things can be "associated" going fro and away - being apart.
"Yet there remains the nagging suspicion that at the highest levels of creative achievement the generation of novelty is not the main issue."
Well then he's not high enough. And seriously, the use of the word "high?" Concentrated, supersaturated, hypersupersaturated, hyposupersaturated, (and then it becomes apparent how stupid putting a word to everything is) powerful, rich, (more accurate ethnocentric words) tripped, wicked (if you want slang), imbued (artsy)...etc...
"Divergent thinking is not much use without the ability to tell a good idea from a bad one, and this selectivity involves convergent thinking."
You're right, I have no use for it. Hahahaha! Good from bad depends upon perception. I'm so far out on the blurr, whooooooOOOOOOooooooOOOOooooaaa, stellar, like, seriously.
"There is no question that a playfully light attitude is typical of creative individuals."
Oh, hallowed sage of pseudo-science, how could you have guessed? To prostration I must, sacred holder of insights!
"If I'm in jail, time is of no consequence." Insight by discipline must always be punishment. So typical of an engineer.
"Despite the carefree air that many creative people affect..."
The engineer had a carefree air? Are you serious? He was talking about jail.
"Vasari wrote in 1550 that when Renaissance painter Paolo Uccello was working out the laws of visual perspective, he would walk back and forth all night, muttering to himself: "What a beautiful thing is this perspective!" while his wife called him back to bed with no success."
Oh finally, some sanity! The psychology writer would do much better if he merely copied what other people wrote from now on.
"But when a person begins to work creatively, all bets are off."
You can say anarchy my loveable little cherubic mperial civil servant. Oh yes you can! Who's a good boy? What's that? Ur a gooooooood boyyy! Oh yes you are!
"In fact, in current psychological research, extroversion and introversion are considered the most stable personality traits that differentiate people from each other and that can be reliably measured. Creative individuals, on the other hand, seem to exhibit both traits simultaneously."
He just tacitly said that creative people were unstable. Slander...not to mention a death wish.
If I didn't have my quixoticisms, I'd be mentally gaunt. Rickets or scurvy, I just can't decide...
So whatcha gunna give the universe, psychologist/psychiatrist? Multi-versing radioactive dark-matter Depakote? The pus coming out of the black holes, that's according to plan? Cuz it's kind of smushing all the planets, and I don't like living in a bunker...all "stable" and such.
"6. Creative people are humble and proud at the same time."
The juxtaposition of antonyms as intelligence is getting really trite. The words bureaucratic, formulaic, claustrophobic, automatoning and systematized come to mind with a relavence and irrelavence...hahaha oh oh oh I know.
"It is remarkable to meet a famous person who you expect to be arrogant or supercilious, only to encounter self-deprecation and shyness instead. ...they know that in comparison with others, they have accomplished a great deal. And this knowledge provides a sense of security, even pride."
Maybe they feel...what's a psychological term/phrase...guilty, ashamed at success?
"When tests of masculinity/femininity are given to young people, over and over one finds that creative and talented girls are more dominant and tough than other girls, and creative boys are more sensitive and less aggressive than their male peers."
So creative boys are never misanthropic, genocidal, psychotic, nihilistic, martial arts specialists, boxers, soccer players...without being androgynous?
"This tendency toward androgyny is sometimes understood in purely sexual terms, and therefore it gets confused with homosexuality."
Only in bigotry.
"A psychologically androgynous person in effect doubles his or her repertoire of responses."
Doubles? I do not have two separated and distinct "repertoires." Once again, implementing numbers incorrectly creates misrepresentations. Learn to count.
"Creative individuals are more likely to have not only the strengths of their own gender but those of the other one, too."
So what happens in societies with more than one gender recognized? Are there other twos, threes, and fours? Please tell me, venerable psychologist. Oh, wait, anthropology's not your field of expertise. Uh huh...
"constantly taking chances without regard to what has been valued in the past rarely leads to novelty that is accepted as an improvement."
Why inject the goal of acceptance? Iconoclasts aren't very good sychophants usually.
And it's because college is obsessed with "acceptance."
""This idea to create something is not my aim. To be different is a negative motive, and no creative thought or created thing grows out of a negative impulse. A negative impulse is always frustrating. And to be different means 'not like this' and 'not like that.'"
Well gosh, every human has a different genetic code...I guess all life is negativly motived to live and existing negatively, except clones. The artist Eva Zeisel must be a clone? The Raelians really must have succeeded...unless the person Eva Zeisel isn't a clone, only the artist...
No teacher, it's not the same, it's creative plagiarism.
Someone will attack my usage of the comma splice. They wouldn't understand the phrase, "for effect." So dense are those.
"I'd say one of the most common failures of able people is a lack of nerve. They'll play safe games. In innovation, you have to play a less safe game, if it's going to be interesting. It's not predictable that it'll go well."
The economist George Stigler appears to produce honesty, but he has the lack of nerve to say his opinions flatly and directly, without the qualifier "I'd say." So much for what he said.
I wonder, would the hallucinated and perceived as real George Stigler have nerve? Perhaps if he was related to Tyler Durden.
And here's the greatest delusion of the article's writer so far...
"9. Most creative people are very passionate about their work, yet they can be extremely objective about it as well. Without the passion, we soon lose interest in a difficult task. Yet without being objective about it, our work is not very good and lacks credibility."
"We?" "our?" He thinks his work, his article, envolves creativity...
That's cute...very cute. IMPOTENCE.
Even in his tiring formulaic juxtaposition, he overcomes the pitalls of Brutus's philosophy. Too bad objective is a euphemism for censorship here. Sigh...I thought that, but no, I was let down. Sigh...
"I think it is very important to find a way to be detached from what you write, so that you can't be so identified with your work that you can't accept criticism and response, and that is the danger of having as much affect as I do. But I am aware of that and of when I think it is particularly important to detach oneself from the work, and that is something where age really does help."
I suppose that's ole Stigler again...his trademark qualifier..."I think."
so...Yeah! Just say it wasn't me...
Well it's not him accepting criticism, it's his detachment. That's not healthy. Age is quite a nice euphemism for "lengthy and superbly maintained indoctrination." Indoctrination in the belief that criticism cannot be accepted if involved and invested personally.
I say, I can be "so identified with [my] work" and accept criticism with grace and poise.
"A badly designed machine causes pain to an inventive engineer, just as the creative writer is hurt when reading bad prose."
I'm reading really lousy prose, and I'm mildly amused.
"When an artist has invested years in making a sculpture, or a scientist in developing a theory, it is devastating if nobody cares."
I didn't make it for them; I made it for me. Silly goose, working with ideas is not for you.
"Yet when a person is working in the area of his of her expertise, worries and cares fall away, replaced by a sense of bliss"
Actually I'm kinda bored too, bored and mildly amused.
"Perhaps the most important quality, the one that is most consistently present in all creative individuals, is the ability to enjoy the process of creation for its own sake"
But the product, that must be accepted by others in order to enjoy it. It is beyond our psychological writer to fathom the unlofty idea of the enjoyment of the ongoing product of creation as well. We must be gods to enjoy life, apparently.
Life just can't be enjoyed...no no no. That hedonism those young people do...no no no, they're irresponsible.
Don't you dare play semantics with me on my usage of "creation!" I'll play them myself, thank you.
"From Creativity: The Work and Lives of 91 Eminent People, by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, published by HarperCollins, 1996."
The study is bias. Let's hear about the creativity of non-eminent, reclusive peoples. What? Oh, that's not politically correct...it would fail to glorify the institution...ohhhhhhh...
So much for psychology.
Come on, let's see what you got.
We may have to butt heads again here. I haven't seen you around much TC; where you been?
Gender expression is quite real to an extent. Certainly many things people atribute to gender are completely irrelivant to any logical scale but gender expression exists none-the-less.
Gender is NOT determined by sex (influenced yes) or we would have a clearly binary system of gender roles and currently, the people that belive in GR's cannot even argree on what they consist of... because they are an ARTIFICIAL social construct.
I may be confused by you're example but there is no such thing as a "very masculine lesbian" in gender terms. Masculine can only logically measure physical triats. Just because I don't like sports, I am in no way feminine, as I have no inherently female triats; men and women BOTH vary on this, it is inane. You are measuring weight with at thermomiter, it doesn't work. Gender roles are bullshit.
What? Please elaborate.
[FONT=Trebuchet MS]¡El Pueblo Unido Jamás Será Vencido![/FONT]
__________________
Lincoln's Underground Network Radical left Radio
Tell me what you think of the Communiqués
Show solidarity through kindness and empathy, join Respectful Discussion Activists
313C7 iVi4RX to my oldschool comrades -EM-
